LIFE AFTER LASP: EMBEDDING THE PARTNERSHIP AS “THE

PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
LIFE AFTER LASP: EMBEDDING THE PARTNERSHIP AS “THE
WAY WE DO BUSINESS”
Introduction by the Head of the Partnership Programme
This is the Local Authority Unit’s plan to March 2008. It sets out how we
will build on the success of the LA Strategic Enabling Programme
(LASP): to develop the partnership between HSE and LAs as enforcing
authorities, and help deliver HSC’s strategy for health and safety in GB.
Although this plan deals largely with LAU’s work, success depends on
many other players – as “partnership” implies. The plan is therefore set
in the broader context of partnership development, and will I hope be of
interest to that wider community. In outline, the objectives are:
¾
shift the focus of partnership work (from establishing the
infrastructure, which was LASP’s objective) to field-based delivery
– making partnership the way we do our business;
¾
to give effect to the conclusions of the HSE “Fundamental
Review”, in particular to develop a set of outcome-focused
success criteria;
¾
to take account of and contribute our experiences to development
of the “better regulation” agenda; and
¾
to strengthen the outward-facing elements of the partnership
towards LAs’ other priorities, the business community, workers,
and other government departments.
There are in my view four principal risks to achieving success. First is
continuing to communicate within a complex set of relationships so as
to raise the profile of the partnership and ultimately of H&S within LAs;
second is gathering convincing evidence to demonstrate that the
partnership is delivering cost-effective outcomes; third is maintaining
the necessary level of “seeding” resources and input from HSE and
LACoRS so that in due course the partnership becomes selfsustaining; and fourth is the potential disruption from work to
establish LBRO – now on a tighter timescale.
It is however also true that there are many opportunities ahead. We
have come a long way in the past three years. I still believe that there
is a great prize to be won from partnership, but that it will be a long
haul. I hope that by March 2008 we will be able to show continued
good progress, and that the investment by both HSE and LAs is paying
off with improved health and safety outcomes.
Phil Scott
January 2007
1
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
LA/HSE PARTNERSHIP PLAN: JANUARY 2007 TO MARCH 2008
1.0
Introduction
1.1
This plan aims to build on the successful conclusion of the strategic
enabling programme (LASP) by setting out the next stage in developing and
embedding the partnership. A full evaluation of the work undertaken by LASP
is still in progress but it is clear that the objectives originally set out in the
Statement of Intent have been substantially met (a conclusion endorsed by
HSC in February 2006). However developments in Government, notably the
Hampton report, have had and will continue to have an influence on the final
direction of the partnership.
1.2
A full review of progress with the partnership, and proposals for future
work, was commissioned by HSE’s two DCEs in February 2006. This segued
into the HSE Fundamental Review in April, which examined the developing
partnership as part of the theme “working with others”. In June HSE’s Board
concluded that the arguments in favour of the partnership remained strong,
and that all concerned should work towards making the partnership “the way
we do business”. There was however a need to be clearer about what
success would look like, and how and when this would be judged.
2.0
LASP’s origin
2.1
The LA strategic programme was initiated in autumn 2003 and
launched in February 2004 as part of HSC’s ‘Strategy for workplace health
and safety in Great Britain to 2010 and beyond’. A key theme of the strategy
is working in partnership. Following earlier consultation about the role of LAs
as enforcing authorities, the strategy made clear the intention to create a new
relationship – a partnership – between local authorities and HSE.
2.2
The drivers behind this intention were the need to get the best value
from LAs’ and HSE’s joint resources, a focus on joined-up government and a
need to ensure more consistent enforcement across enforcing authorities.
The detailed story of LASP is set out in the programme review. The most
valuable reflection on LASP is probably the matter of the lessons which have
been learned, and how they will be applied in the next phase of partnership
development. These are summarised at Annex 2.
2.3
One obvious but key fact to be remembered is that HSE and LAs are
different: HSE is a national regulator with a focus on H&S; LAs are complex,
multi-purpose and democratically accountable bodies. An inherent
consequence is that, even as the partnership strengthens, HSE and LAs will
not always agree on priorities, allocation of resources or the correct course of
action in every instance. Such disagreements should not be regarded as
detrimental to the partnership; indeed, recognising our different perspectives
helps prove how far we have come.
3.0
Onwards and upwards.…..
2
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
3.1
Delivering impact through the partnership means greater joining up of
front line resources – but it is clear that the range of roles and contributors
within HSE and LAs to secure success is very wide: for local government the
key players include LACoRS, its Policy Forum (an officer advisory body) the
LGAs and individual LAs; LA elected members; senior officials; EH
practitioners; county liaison groups; and for HSC/E they include senior
officials; Fit3 programme staff; CoSAS; HSL; CDS; sector and policy staff;
FOD HoDs; partnership teams; Heads of Operations; and individual field staff.
At the centre LAU aims to catalyse these many contributors.
3.2
The plan to move the partnership forward must take the challenge of
communications with these key players into account – it is important that all of
these contributors/teams understand their role in delivering the partnership.
This plan sets out the workstreams which continue to support and develop the
partnership, driven largely by LAU (in conjunction with LACoRS and some key
policy staff such as CACTUS and the enforcement programme), and the field
partnership teams (see summary of their role at Annex 1). Partnership teams
have been central to building and maintaining the relationship with local
authorities, including the development of joint enforcement plans. The
inclusion of local authority secondees in the partnership teams has had a
considerable beneficial effect in building trust and confidence with LA
colleagues. LAU will continue to play a lead role in giving direction and
support to the regional partnership teams in their role of local partnership
management.
3.3
Another feature of the programme has been the creation of both
national and regional governance arrangements that will need continuing
support, and efforts to ensure a voice for local government in policy and
programme work. Centrally the redeveloped HELA, with a new membership,
clear terms of reference and support from LACoRS is able to guide and
support work across HSE and LAs. LAU will also need to support the newly
formed Local Government Panel, comprising elected members nominated by
the LA Associations, which meets with the Commission twice a year.
3.4
Cross governmental activity: the Commission and Executive will rely
upon the support of LAU, within HSE, in LA enforcement matters and as a
reference source in supporting responses to official correspondence – though
in practice, and in the spirit of partnership, colleagues in LACoRS provide the
essential LG perspective. LAU will continue its cross-government role, in
support of policy colleagues, in representing HSE interests, as the postHampton agenda and infrastructure becomes established, and as the LG
White Paper proposals are developed and come into effect.
3.5
The ultimate objective of the partnership – the delivery of efficient,
effective, consistent (etc) regulation by HSE and LAs, in delivering the
Commission’s priorities – is in practice planned by a mixture of the Fit3
programmes, joint planning groups in the field, and LA and HSE practitioners.
The governance arrangements for the partnership recognise the importance
of the LA contribution to policy and programme development as well as
3
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
delivery. This plan is designed to help LAU facilitate the partnership’s
development in a post-LASP environment.
4.0
Objectives for the next 15 months (detail in Annex 3)
4.1
The next step is to continue to develop the detailed workstreams for the
partnership programme through to March 2008, and deliver the related
products and processes that achieve the following objectives:
1.
to maintain, service and continue to develop the infrastructure
built during LASP, including support for LAs. LAU will continue to
promote and develop appropriate and relevant training, guidance and
support for LAs in conjunction with the central policy teams and with
regional partnership teams;
2.
to shift the focus (from infrastructure development for the
partnership) to field-based delivery;
3.
to strengthen the links to business, to LAs’ wider objectives, and
to relevant government departments;
4.
to raise the profile of H&S within LG, against a common (with HSE)
performance standard, and exploring the potential for including
H&S objectives within the LAA. Establishing performance indicators
in line with the s.18 draft guidance and a recast vision in light of the
outcomes of the programme workstreams and taking account of postHampton work;
5.
to maintain a strong emphasis on communications, in particular to
address the “hearts and minds” challenges that remain inside
HSE;
6.
to develop (a) a set of outcome-focused success criteria for the
partnership, to enable a view to be taken at an appropriate time of
the balance of costs and benefits; and (b) a proportionate process
for gathering outcome information from partnership work, in order
to inform the cost/benefit judgement;
7.
to deliver those elements of LASP which have become dependent
on progress with the Better Regulation agenda and therefore
remain outstanding following the conclusion of LASP and in doing
so, to take an active role in relevant BR initiatives, promoting our
experiences as an exemplar of good central/LG relationships;
8.
to give effect to the decisions of the HSE “Fundamental Review”,
which concluded that the LA/HSE partnership was a vital
contributor to HSC’s strategic delivery framework, and should be
sustained and developed to become “the way we do business”.
5.0
Governance
5.1
Delivery of the plan will be overseen by a Partnership Management
Group. It met for the first time in October 2006. As SCS “champion” for the
Partnership Programme, Phil Scott is accountable for delivery of the plan to
4
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
Justin McCracken. The wider partnership is subject to various levels of
strategic governance, principally HELA and the LGP/HSC meetings (both of
which have their own ToRs, settled during the governance workstream in
LASP).
6.0
Risks and pressures
6.1
LAU maintains a risk log for the programme, subject to review by PMG.
The principal risks are as follows.
The health of the relationship
6.2
It has been helpful that the Fundamental Review has broadly endorsed
the objectives and direction of the partnership. This has brought a focus for
the work of the partnership teams to deliver the wish of the HSE Board that
partnership working becomes “the way we do business”. But the success of
LASP as an enabling programme needs to be seen in a realistic light. The
relationship had been allowed to deteriorate over many years and trust levels
between both central and local services remain fragile. There are a number of
sceptics in Local Government and HSE at various management levels who
may capitalise on any obvious weakness in supporting the partnership.
6.3
LAU is at the centre of the need to continue to grease the mechanics of
the partnership and ensure it is not only maintained, but also developed
towards self-sustainability. Though the partnership will probably always need
a central focus, and will always have areas of sensitivity that will need careful
handling, and good communications, it will need particular nurture in the next
few years. LAU is being re-structured to enable it to be more strategic,
working alongside the regional partnership teams.
External pressures
6.4
The Better Regulation agenda presents a clear pressure on the work of
the programme and represents both threats and opportunities for the future.
The Local Better Regulation Office (LBRO), being created as a direct result of
the Hampton recommendations, has a focus upon Environmental Health and
Trading Standards regulatory responsibilities. The current Rogers review,
aimed at rationalising LA regulatory priorites, represents a threat to the
position of H&S issues and their resourcing. Further, the Retail Enforcement
Pilot is looking to create a regulatory regime across these and other
boundaries. The key areas of concern are around reducing burdens on
business and consequently reviewing issues of consistency of enforcement,
priorities and performance. The areas that concern the LBRO are also the
issues at the heart of the health and safety partnership structures created
across the country. Therefore as the LBRO develops its portfolio of work, it
will inevitably ‘cross’ many of the workstreams developed within the
partnership programme. It remains essential that work on the partnership is
well informed by, and seeks to influence, the overall better regulation agenda.
5
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
6.5
There is much other activity on the LG front which we need to keep up
with: continuing restructuring in response to Lyons; the LG White paper and
in particular the approach to LAs performance taken within the reformed
inspection regime; the role of LAAs as a key driver of priorities and their
resourcing; overall such that the LG environment is likely to look very different
in 2008 from the position when LASP was conceived.
Communications and sensitivities
6.6
It is important to ensure that communication and understanding within
HSE is effective. Mis-information and wrong messages to LA colleagues
could easily undermine the fragile relationship. Financial pressures and
prioritisation may well lead people to believe that partnership working is
additional work and not a priority, set against traditional approaches. It is also
important that HSE staff understand the relationship between HSE and LAs
and don’t see it as a ready and directable resource that will ease pressures on
HSE. There is some distance to go in matching LA practitioners’ enthusiasm
for the partnership and Fit3 with similarly positive attitudes across all parts of
HSE. This is as much a question of culture as of better communications – we
see a major push is needed to ensure that all HSE contributors and potential
beneficiaries of the partnership are supportive and “on message”.
6.7
LAs, like HSE, are constantly juggling competing pressures. In the
case of regulatory services, Environmental Health departments are being
driven by the Food Standards Agency (FSA), DeFRA, Department of Health
(DoH) (smoking agenda), and many others. This results in demand on ever
diminishing resources, clearly evidenced by the particular pressure from the
FSA, which has been one of the main reasons for the historical drift of
resources away from health and safety.
6.8
National EH issues eg avian flu, licensing, smoking and other public
safety matters occurring from time to time will always be a priority for LAs. It
will be important to ensure that HSE keeps abreast of public safety concerns
in planning future joint working with LAs.
Resources
6.9
The HSE budget for 2006/07 and 2007/08 is under considerable
pressure and in common with others LAU will need to make significant
savings over the next 18 months. The structure originally conceived for LAU
in the LASP review has had to be re-visited in light of reduced finances. In
essence the overall budget for LAU has been reduced by around 40% taken
as a whole. The consequence is a reduction in programme money and in
payroll. The decision has been taken to protect funding for the regional
partnership teams in 2007/08 but to reduce the structure of LAU to 14 posts,
which includes an inward secondee from a local authority. The Unit will be
substantially based in Bootle but will have a London presence. These
financial pressures mean that resources will not be available to support LAs at
the level originally expected. This will have to be carefully managed across
the organisation as expectations have been built in LA circles; the programme
6
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
will need to be even more innovative to help fill the gaps. The area most
significantly affected by this funding shortage is likely to be the provision of
training for LAs.
6.10 Resourcing issues also encompass the continuing pressures on LA EH
departments, and the need for partnership players to press for a higher profile
for H&S within overall LA budgets. The current Better Regulation debate on
setting fewer priorities for LAs may present a considerable challenge to
maintaining the modest increase in overall LA resources on H&S over the past
couple of years. And smaller authorities in particular frequently find it very
difficult to find the resources to play their part in the additional demands of
joint project planning, regional governance, and the like.
Delivering results
6.11 The partnership is essentially “on trial” during the current work year –
the first which has systematically planned for partnership activities in the field.
We know that it is difficult to access consistent information about LA activities
and successes – both qualitative and quantitative. It has been made clear to
LAs and partnership teams that it will be essential for a majority of LAs to
provide good quality information to demonstrate the value of front-line work
during 2006-07. Some quantitative information is vital – eg about the use of
resources, and about enforcement, but – with the agreement of the PMG –
LAs have each been challenged also to produce two “stories” about their Fit3
work: short accounts of activities and outcomes. These should provide the
Fit3 teams with a rich source of feedback.
6.12 The HELA Extranet is a product of the work of the programme but is
still in its early development stages. It is hoped that ultimately the Extranet will
become the main vehicle for sharing data, on a real time basis and for
capturing and disseminating good and/or best practice. It is also the
mechanism that will be used to collect performance management information
from local authorities and thereby contribute to the publication of national
statistics and progress towards the Commission’s priorities. LAU will work
closely with both Communications Directorate and COSAS, Statistics unit to
ensure consistency with the wider work of HSE.
6.13 The development of the partnership performance framework (and the
s.18 guidance on which it is based) is a priority workstream within the plan,
though it remains subject to the vagaries of LBRO’s establishment.
7.0
Milestones
7.1
The main milestones are clearly the points at which it is possible to look
back and judge the effectiveness of the partnership during the work years
2006-07 and 2007-08, that is, in summer 2007 and summer 2008. At the
latter point we will also need to assess the success of the partnership overall,
against the criteria being developed.
7
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
7.2
A detailed project plan based on Annex 3 is under development to set
out the timescales for achievement of important milestones. Progress with
the specific and detailed work set out in that plan will be reported quarterly to
the PMG and Justin McCracken.
February 2007
8
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
ANNEX 1: ROLES OF FIELD PARTNERSHIP TEAMS
Partnership Teams embody the Health & Safety Commission vision of HSE and LAs
working together to deliver HSC strategies.
In short…..
The PM role is a proactive one, acting as a catalyst in promoting, externally and
internally, regional and local partnership, and building relationships of trust and
goodwill. We work closely with LAU and LACoRS as part of the wider team
sustaining and developing the partnership, and helping deliver the HSC vision of
partnership as ‘the way we do business’. We provide support to LAs, working with
our liaison groups (and others) in promoting Fit3 and encouraging LAs to develop
their H&S workplans around the Fit3 portfolio. We look to FOD colleagues in
particular to make a reality of the partnership in our front-line work.
What does a partnership team do?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Facilitate liaison groups as a forum for partnership
Facilitate communication in both directions between HSE and LAs
Educate and inform HSE colleagues as to the benefits of partnership
Seek, coordinate and encourage delivery commitments to Fit3 from LAs
Work with FOD managers to coordinate FOD and LA delivery of Fit3
Seek out, organise and communicate information about LA achievements
Promote and support governance arrangements appropriate to delivering HSC
strategy in the regions
Support LA managers and Elected Members with information about HSC
priorities and the reasons for them
Support development of national strategies e.g. buddy to Programme teams
Engage and influence other strategic delivery bodies in the regions e.g. Crime
and Disorder Partnerships, Local Strategic Partnerships
Provide proactive and reactive advice and guidance to LAs
Support Partners in working through uncertainty
Support LAs in delivery of the HSC Enforcement Policy through facilitating
benchmarking, peer review etc
Provide support in terms of EHP competence, helping develop, coordinate
and, where appropriate, deliver training that aids delivery of LA commitments
Encourage experimentation and initiatives which are consistent with breaking
down barriers, such as joint warranting
Help identify opportunities where joint working has the potential to deliver more
than the sum of the separate approaches
What partnership teams can’t do
•
•
•
•
•
Dictate how LA managers or Elected Members choose to allocate or prioritise
resources
Force deadlines or commitments out of LAs, especially if there is short notice
or requests come out of line with LAs own planning cycles
Oversee, audit, police or manage LAs workplan delivery
Bar LAs from doing non Fit3 work if they perceive over-riding local priorities
Dictate to FOD managers how they deliver their operating plans
What partnership teams need from you
9
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
•
an appreciation of the role of the partnership in HSC/HSE’s business and
support for it
•
information from programme teams which is timely and co-ordinated
•
active help to develop HSE’s capability to be a good partner, both positively
but also by avoiding common pitfalls, viz:
¾ understand the nature of the partnership and LAs’ role in policy and
programme design as well as delivery
¾ actively maintain good working relationships with LA colleagues with whom
you have contact
¾ recognise the wider benefits to HSC/E and H&S of providing support.
¾ recognise that LAs have pressures on them other than Fit3
¾ recognise that partnership is a two-way process, and that HSE and FOD
need to show where it will support LAs’ local priorities as well as HSC’s
¾ eschew patronising behaviour and injudicious use of language
¾ remember that good communications is at the heart of one HSE relating to
and working with 410 LAs!
10
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
ANNEX 2: LESSONS LEARNED FROM LASP
¾
the value of inward EHO secondments (knowledge, trust etc)
¾
Good (open, honest) working relationship with LACORS
¾
keeping the pressure on - the dangers of key messages being ignored,
forgotten etc (hearts & minds)
¾
support & visibility from top eg HSC Chair, Joyce/Sandy, Chief Exec etc,
Conference
¾
importance of aligning cycles between LAs & HSE - getting
messages/info across at right time, early enough eg Fit3
¾
acknowledge different perspective of LAs - we can’t dictate terms
¾
importance of choosing the right measures & reaching agreement on
what to measure & when
¾
key people in key posts driving forward
¾
importance of effective comms & ability/willingness of those providing
the "products"
¾
high visibility of LAU at LA meetings/events
¾
recognising the differences with devolved administrations
¾
difficulty of changing systems in HSE to align with LAs and vice versa
¾
sensitivities around competencies of LA officers.
11
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
ANNEX 3: WORKSTREAMS
Planning objective: to specify the detailed workstreams for the partnership
programme through to March 2008, and deliver the related products and
processes.
Product/Process
Progress/comments
P1:- Updating LAU/partnership plan
Final version of plan agreed Feb ’07 and
and risk and issues register.
partnership risk register linked to AD’s
partnership report and plan prepared for
Partnership management committee
December 06 meeting.
Objective 1 to maintain, service and continue to develop the infrastructure built during
LASP, including support for LAs
1.1 Flexible warranting:
Support to new and existing pilots
Pilot development and support provided by
Partnership Teams
Develop system for national adoption Progress reported to HELA 11/10/06 who
of flexible warrants including
agreed to set up Task and Finish Group
infrastructure development and wider which has now met several times. Initial April
rollout
deadlines may be problematic
Ongoing support of flexible warrants
Workload will depend on final outcomes from
Task and Finish Group
Impact upon EA Regs and need for
Position paper prepared. Await outcome of
their review/revision
Flexible Warrants Task and Finish Group
1. 2 Training, competence and
Includes agreeing new training and changes
guidance:
to EH training and degree courses, CPD
Delivering greater access to
arrangements & Conferences, defining
training/delivering SITNA outcomes
LA/HSE competence framework
Technical and enforcement guidance New electronic CoI facility set up by GB
review and revision
6/11/06. Requires liaison with OPSD to
coordinate with the ‘saving time project’
1.3 Scientific support and research:
Managing S&T initiative infrastructure Ongoing; G Bell interim report to JMcC Feb
07.
Managing outcomes from S&T
Policy agreed June ‘06 with BEU/REFIT re:
initiative
software developments. Some conflict
developing Jan 07 re LA priorities vs Fit3
priorities and impact on HSE resources.
Evaluation of S&T initiative
G Bell developing plan for Spring ’07; initial
direction agreed with Phil Scott Feb 07.
1.4 e-communication systems
New Home page design being implemented
Extranet development &
Feb 07. CDS work to develop intranet pages
maintenance
on extranet will require some rework of HELA
extranet, CDS timescale not yet given. As of
8/11/06 GB joined new ‘HSE Extranet’
management group chaired by BEU.
Website and intranet web pages
Transfer of responsibility from GK to GB
maintenance
began in January ’07. New project to deliver
greater HELex/Website consistency being
developed
12
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
Writing and editing of LAU newsletter
1.5 Support for new governance
structures
LGP support incl briefing of HSE
Senior managers and Executive
HELA support
Partnership management group
support
1.6 Maintaining/coordinating internal
links
Policy Group, Sectors, SU & HU,
FOD etc
Currently produced every month; working to
create e-express type newsletter (could be
linked with launch of HELA extranet new
Home page)
GB team also responsible for collating
periodic reports on progress with partnership
workstreams to HSE senior managers.
GB team provide joint Secretariat with
LACORS including minute taking and
clearing; agreeing agenda and ensuring HSE
papers are fit for purpose.
Developing role likely to assume significant
importance involving LACORS and HSE
senior Managers.
Occasionally high priority role ensuring
information etc is provided to LA audience in
appropriate & timely ways; current focus on
revised topic inspection packs (TIPs). SU
TIPs launched in Dec 06 (except Noise &
Vibration due in Feb ’07). HU revision
processes being chased by FIT3 programme
office
Objective 2 : to shift the focus (from infrastructure development for the partnership) to
field-based delivery
2.1 FIT3 liaison and support:
Support for annual planning
Support for LA feedback & project
reporting
Facilitating FIT3 contact with LAs and
other internal/external stakeholders
GB took over role from Kath Heywood on
1/11/06 and has ensured LACORS
representation at FIT planning & Delivery
meetings. PM buddying system in place
linking projects with partnership teams.
Graham B is progressing S&T perspective
In year quantitative reporting by LAs was
been patchy as expected. AD Wrote to LAs
in November 06 cancelling need for further in
year returns. BEU able to provide business
analysis support where IT/Software issues
may be involved.
LAU act as facilitator/mediator as required.
2.2 Partnership team projects
Potential projects to be discussed and
List of potential projects to be agreed agreed with PMs following recruitment of
replacement PLOs during April 07
with PMs
Objective 3 : to strengthen the links to business, to LAs’ wider objectives, and to
relevant government departments
13
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
3.1 LOPP, LAPS and FOILE
Support for LOPP/LA interface and
communications
GB role to mediate between LOPP, LACORS
and Account Managers and Directors for
jointly enforced and LA enforced LOPPs e.g.
Tesco, Asda, B&Q, HBOS, Greggs
Support for LOPP
Not yet agreed - in negotiation with
expansion/development beyond
LACORS. Agreed outcome expected by
March 07
March ‘07
Ongoing support and development of Working with FOD where jointly enforced
businesses become FOILE candidates and
LAPS (incl 3-way LAPS) incl links
can therefore become 3 way LAPS. Latest 3with FOILE that could result in new
way LAPS is a sector based one with British
LAPS
Frozen Foods Federation launched Jan 07.
Support to LBRO review of
BRE now taking an increased interest in this
LOPP/LAPS/HAP etc
work. GB sits on expert working group and
has provided information to deadline as
requested plus other support; AD sits on
Management Steering Group.
3.2 Liaison with FSA
Likely to become wider than current due to
LBRO/Hampton pressures. More informal but
regular liaison over priority planning issues is
likely as a result of review of LAC 67/1 and
FSA risk rating system. FSA have also
sought HSE policy and views re LA auditing
on 20/11/06. FSA invited to HELA task &
finish group on LAC 67/1 review for 5 March
07.
Objective 4: - to raise the profile of H&S within LG, against a common (with HSE)
performance standard, and exploring the potential for including H&S objectives within
the LAA process
Need for overview of developments as LG
4.1 Performance management and
White paper from DCLG also covers this
monitoring
area and BRE may also play a role in
Influencing LBRO performance
development. New PF expected for 2009.
framework (PF) development and
developments with LAAs and local
PSAs Establishing performance
monitoring processes and reporting
arrangements
4.2 HSC guidance/S18 ‘standard’
drafting support guidance,
consultation, piloting and
launch/publication
Progress reported to HELA 11/10/06. Agreed
to “shadow run” with willing EAs from 04/07
for adoption by 04/08. Volunteer LAs and
FOD division being sought Feb 07.
4.3 Audit
Current view is to develop self-assessment
Establishing common audit
technique against new S18 standard
processes for all EAs
Objective 5: - to maintain a strong emphasis on communications, in particular to
address the “hearts and minds” challenges that remain inside HSE
5.1 Comms plan
Plan and bids for 07/08 submitted to Comms
Directorate deadline. LACoRS invited to
Comms VDC Feb 07
14
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
5.2 Hearts and Minds plan
5.3 Annual partnership conference
and exhibition
5.4 Revised elected members
handbook
5.5 Development and production of
Partnership Annual Report
5.6 Liaison with CDS/CoSAS re
gathering and processing of
statistical information
5.7 Preparation and publication of LA
prosecution database
5.8 Liaison with press office re press
releases, articles etc
5.9 Liaison and promotional work
with professional bodies
Core pack developed 26 Oct ’06; induction
briefings for all new HSE staff begun
16/11/06
Successfully delivered on 12/12/06; First
planning meeting for next event Feb 07.
Launched at Partnership Conference
12/12/06
05/06 Annual Report completed /launched at
Partnership Conference 12/12/06
Incl. use of new partnership branding and
agreeing final version of LAE1 for 06/07.
05/06 Prosecution Database completed and
published Dec 06.
Ongoing - AD clears press releases, articles
etc as necessary
Ongoing - Includes speaking and supporting
HSE speakers at CIEH/REHIS events.
Objective 6 : to develop (a) a set of outcome-focused success criteria for the
partnership, to enable a view to be taken at an appropriate time of the balance of
costs and benefits; and (b) a proportionate process for gathering outcome
information from partnership work, in order to inform the cost/benefit judgement
6.2 Evaluation
Evaluation of programme – monitor
progress with existing plan.
Evaluation of partnership – establish
plan, measures and delivery.
Evaluation of specific projects – e.g.
Extranet; flexible warranting pilots,
revised training support, S&T
initiative etc
G Bell establishing mechanism with CoSAS.
‘Initial thoughts’ favour the idea of a
‘balanced business scorecard’ approach.
Initial proposals revised by GB Dec 06 –
needs formal linking to LAU partnership plan
by Mar 07.
HELA extranet evaluation currently restricted
in scope due to lack of research funding.
Objective 7: to deliver those elements of LASP which have become dependent on
progress with the Better Regulation agenda and therefore remain outstanding
following the conclusion of LASP and in doing so, to take an active role in relevant
BR initiatives, promoting our experiences as an exemplar of good central/LG
relationships
15
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
7.1 Datasharing
HSE/EA pilot development
7.2 REP
Support for REPs ongoing
development/impact
7.3 Support to LBRO not referenced
elsewhere above.
7.4 Support work with RHING
7.5 Liaison with LSIF/Audit
Commission
Initial discussions in October have led to
more concrete proposals being taken forward
by Better Regulation Branch in HSE. BRE
and Treasury have hinted that funds might
be available for some of this work, which
needs also to encompass LA dimension
E.g. Sharing Prosecution/Notice data;
asbestos licensing and notification/Waste
transfer links.
AD is part of Management Steering Group;
BM for GB continues to act as LAU
representative at working level on REP by
special agreement with FOD ESE Division.
New governance procedures expected
following BRE takeover and informal OGC
review. REP update meeting for GB and BM
26 Feb 07
NO’D is on secondment to BRE until Jan 08.
AD to organise next meeting in early ‘07 to
establish role of Chief Executives and Chairs
of 7 thematic regulators
Allan Davies & Phil Scott generally lead at
SCS level whilst N O’D takes lead elsewhere
whilst on secondment to LBRO. Needs a
watching brief as LSIF perceive policy
overlap and conflict with LBRO/ BRE.
Objective 8 : to give effect to the decisions of the HSE “Fundamental Review”,
which concluded that the LA/HSE partnership was a vital contributor to HSC’s
strategic delivery framework, and should be sustained and developed to become
“the way we do business”
8.1 Official correspondence and
enquiries
Responses to PQs, Ministerial
submissions, TO’s etc
General enquiries and concerns from
and about LA H&S regulators
8.2 Finance and budgetary control
8.3 Interviewing & appointment of
and support for inward/outward
secondments
8.4 HELA innovation/best practice
awards
Judging HELA innovation/best
practice awards with
recommendations to HSC and
subsequent promulgation via ecomms systems
8.5 Teamworking/collaboration with
LACoRS
As and when and as per agreed deadline
with Secretariat. London LAU take lead.
As and when but Bootle LAU take lead
AD agrees plans etc for PEFD.
New PLOs to replace outgoing tranche will
be required shortly; recruitment process for 5
new secondees begun Feb 07.
GB and AD did judging on 20/11/06, HSC
agreed recommendations end Nov; winners
to be told in time for speeches to be
prepared for Partnership Conference on 12
Dec.
Ongoing – includes all the above plus regular
two monthly ‘team’ meetings
16
PAPER H3/06
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HSE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME
Coordinating input to legislative etc
reviews
Role is to ensure LACORS are consulted;
LAU only comments directly where strictly
necessary i.e. where LAs views haven’t been
sought/taken into account/understood by
HSE
17